1# Breakthrough

1

Breakthrough #1

2

Breakthrough

Media Teamof

Lignano 2014

EDITRESS

Sabrina ArianaMellerowic (DE)

VIDEO-EDITRESS

Carolina Comis (IT)

JOURNALISTS

Amy Campo Mc Evoy (ES)

Gianmarco Franchini (IT)

Riccardo Passarella (CH)

Siebe Geerts (BE)

Fabrizio Zamparelli (IT)

www.facebook.com/lignano2014

Table of Contents.

The Media Team. 4

Euromaidan Timeline 5

„There is no fear“ - Interview with Alex Guzenko 6

“Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don’t lose faith” - The Future of the EU 8

Beyond Polictical Democracy 10

A prisoners life: A long way to dignity 12

EU Institutions Guide 14

Europe 2020 - A predictalbe failure? 16

Addictions in Europe 18

Migration: Would we exist without it? 20

If we’re one tribe, where is the love? 22

1# Breakthrough

3

Where do you want to break through?

ou might now wonder what this newspaper is about or why it actually exists. You came to this session to debate politics competitively, not to look at two irritating blue eyes staring from the cover of this paper. Let‘s put it this way: You‘re certainly not wrong when

you think that you came to Lignano to discuss political issues, it is even a competition. However, there is much more than that. How much more there is depends on yourself.

“Every challenge you encounter in life is a fork in the road. You have the choice to choose which way to go - backward, forward, breakdown or breakthrough”

(Ifeanyi Enoch Onuoha).

Everybody has aims. These differ from person to person. Some people long for freedom and democracy, others for the latest RayBan sunglasses. Despite our different backgrounds, visions and needs we all have something in common: There is always an object we long for, a target we want to achieve or accomplish. Every single one of us faces personal challenges every day. EYP can be one of those challenges. Within the European Youth Parliament as an organisation as well as each session you attend including this one in Lignano you will be pushed and chal-lenged, sometimes towards and even beyond your personal limits. But aren‘t these challenges a thrill or even an impulsion to continue? In my eyes, they are. I see every challenge not as a gridlock but rather a path to experience a new level. This new level can be a new position, a new country, new people or new tasks… the list is endless. Another word to describe this path is BREAKTHROUGH. We, as the media team encourage you to step out of your comfort zone, to fight for your opinion, challenge yourself, break through stereotypes and open your eyes! Be ready to jump into the cold water EYP resembles at the beginning. It won‘t be cold for long, be-lieve me. After a day it will become a bubbling whirl pool you might not want to leave anymore! It doesn‘t matter whether your greatest wish at the moment are a fashionable pair of sunglasses or democratic legitimacy, it‘s your own choice what you will make out of the following days. Whether you actually break through your own walls, stereotypes or disinterest towards a politi-

cal issue or if you choose to stay outside of the water in the dusty sand.

If you choose to continue reading this first newspaper you will get insights into some of the issues that you will discuss within the next

days. Believe me, it‘s worth it!

Sabrina

Y

Edito

rial

Breakthrough #1

4

The Media Team.

1# Breakthrough

5

Breakthrough #1

6

“There is no fear“Alex Guzenko has been a member of EYP Ukraine since March 2012. He is one out of numerous active protestants of Euromaidan and now part of the organising core team of the recently launched website “Ukrainian Crisis Media Center“. For this project he now works with foreign media agencies, writes press releases, monitors needs and checks the validity as well as credibility of information to fight Russian Propaganda. Sabrina Mellerowic had the chance to interview the 19-year-old stu-dent on his Euromaidan experience.

How much time did you spend demon-strating and what was your main im-pulse to spend this time in the cold?

I enjoy when events happen. Euromaidan featured days of steadiness and days of dras-tic actions, which escalated to the highest ex-tent and then suddenly drop. My admiration has been always focused on the escalation of the conflict. I conceive that only a direct, clear action will facilitate changes. What has happened in Ukraine can be compared to a revolution or a war, where cold weather is far not the most hampering circumstance. At a revolution or a war each must have a task to fulfill, a role to play in order to win. My role has been exposing events to the glob-al community. I have shared my experienc-es in EYP and non-EYP articles, numerous Facebook posts, which drew attention to at least my, at that point unaware EYP-friends.

Have you ever feared getting seriously injured and did you still decide to attend the protests?

There is no fear. I have always believed that even death for the sake of an idea or the country is the most honorable act of a citizen. When the situation is on the edge, the gap between action and no-action in-creases in geometrical consequence. Ac-tion implies being at the forefront; while

no action equals to posting on Face-book and watching TV at home. The an-swer is obvious. Someone has to make a change, and if it is no me, who is it then?

What happened at Euromaidan that could not be seen on Television or in newspa-pers?

Emotions and spirit of the people; those cannot be captured by any camera world-wide. I do not think there has been a single spot captured in the aperture of a photo camera. Speaking of the everyday media work – so far no photo or video evidence has been found, displaying who started the massive shooting on February 20, 2014.

Did your attitude towards the protests change when they became violent?

Have you noticed that at the very begin-ning, the action was identified as Euro-maidan and then changed to Maidan? Eu-romaidan implies a peaceful democratic, steady cause, as it is usually done in Europe. Once Ukraine’s government initiated the bloodshed, the space for negotia-tions vanished, because you cannot talk to some-one who points a gun into your face. Peo-

1# Breakthrough

7

ple talk to people, while guns speak sole-ly with guns. Once violence unfolded, the European cause stepped back and the national cause stood upfront. In or-der to move further (to Europe), we need to have a firm foundation to build it on.

What‘s your opinion on the current situa-tion in Crimea?

Russian troops for no reason entered Ukrain-ian territory, violating multiple international conventions and treaties. A similar situation would be if I come to your house and claim that onwards the apartment is mine. Russia keeps claiming that the Russian speaking community needs support and protection, from Ukraine’s nationalists who took over all the power – it is the biggest lie I have ever heard. As a Russian speaker within Ukraine, I have never faced any discrimination; neither did my Russian speaking family or friends. There is no language or ethnic discrimina-tion in Ukraine.

Russia has started an unreasoned military intervention and it has to be stopped, be-fore the conflict escalates.

Do you personally think that there is a solution? If yes what would be the most reasonable one?

The solution is simple – Russia has to with-draw their troops from Ukraine. Insatia-ble empirical endeavors of Putin must be stopped, before he goes further.In the meanwhile a massive information war is taking place. Numerous media re-sources misinform or distort the reality.

“Emotions and spirit of the people; those cannot be cap-tured by any camera worldwide.“

“People talk to people, while guns speak solely with guns. Once violence unfolded, the European cause step-ped back and the national cause stood upfront. „

If you want to follow the current situation in Ukraine have a look at Alex Guzenko‘s work and

visit the Ukrainian Crisis Media center:

uacrisis.org or www.facebook.com/uacrisis

Breakthrough #1

8

“Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick

Don’t lose faith” (Steve Jobs)

by Amy campo mc evoy

1# Breakthrough

9

he European Union’s popularity is rapidly decreasing, it is paying the price for what some call economic and social failure and

our trading bloc is at risk. Will the European Union recover like Steve Jobs did when he was fired? Will we overcome European skepticism and nationalist ideologies?

When in 1973 Steve Jobs dropped out of Reed College, his future seemed quite dark. The 1st of April of 1976 however, Steve Wozniak, Ron Wayne and himself introduced the Apple Com-puter, a, soon to become, worldwide hit, which would not only revolutionise technology as it was known but moreover challenge all existing competition.

After the Second World War Europe’s future was also dark and worrying. However, in the years following the war, a solution began to slowly but steadily develop. The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) (1951), the EURATOM (1957) and the Single European Act (1987) cul-minated in the Maastricht Treaty, where, in 1992, the European Union was formed. A tight union between countries of one same continent: a promising concept which had never been seen before.

While Steve Jobs was working for Apple, he treated the company as his birth child whilst working towards new product development, in-novation and quality with hope. The initial eco-nomic, political and social advances of the EU, alongside its respect of national sovereignty led to the initial response of the EU being one of hope too. Hope for a united Europe, a brighter future, a future with no wars.

Nevertheless Steve Jobs’ career path was not al-ways stable. He created his own business, from its roots, and appointed the man who was to fire him, just as the European Union set the basis for the economic recession which would hit the trading bloc: the common currency and mar-kets. Steve Jobs was fired in 1985 and in 2008 an economic recession hit Europe, rendering many member states weary about the future of the EU, increasing European skepticism, and in-creasing states’ desire to support national sover-

eignty rather than to go towards further Europe-an integration.

Countries such as the UK have always shown greater interest in maintaining their own sov-ereign rights, as they never fully opened their borders nor adopted the common European currency. In 2010, 47% of voters in the UK de-clared they wanted to leave the union, and this opinion was shared in countries such as Latvia or Hungary. Today however countries which had always been in favour of the European Un-ion are showing increased anti-European signs. Unemployment, inefficient policies, the cost of membership and the problems of the Euro are all reasons backing some political parties’ views who stand against the European Union. What is the point of having a union which does not im-prove a states’ position, but rather puts its well-being at stake?

None, if what we are looking for is our state’s interest only. However, Schuman clearly identi-fied that the European Union’s role is not only to improve the economic stability of the countries. The European Union, in his eyes, is about secu-rity. Steve Jobs was necessary for Apple’s suc-cess, just as the European Union is a key play-er in world peace. It has led to increased trade, communication and cooperation. Without it, we would struggle to discuss, debate and agree. The European Union is needed.

When in 1996 a struggling Apple Company re-hired Steve Jobs, he rescued it, and the inven-tions that followed marked almost two decades of successes for the business. Today the Euro-pean Union is struggling too, but if we trust our union, there is a bright future ahead of us. Co-operation is the key; we need to work towards a stronger European Union. We need to per-severe in our aim of becoming a united block, because, as Steve Jobs said: “If you really look closely, most overnight successes took a long time.”

“Hope for a united Europe, a brighter future, a future with no wars.“

T“Steve Jobs was necessary for Apple’s success, just as the European Union is a key player in world peace.“

Breakthrough #1

10

I t seems that the European Union (EU) suf-fers from a form democratic deficit. Many attack the legitimacy of the EU by saying

that the citizens are not enough in control of its functioning.

In fact, the European system does not allow for referenda and it is difficult for citizens to introduce initiatives (the conditions of Arti-cle 11 TEU are indeed restrictive). Apart from that, the European Parliament (EP), consid-ered as the democratic pillar of the Union by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Strasbourg Court (ECtHR), is usually criticised for not being incisive enough in the law mak-ing procedure. Its weakness also competes with the monopoly on legislative initiative of the Commission and the predominant role of the Council of ministers. These aspects are completed by a lack of transparency and the deparliamentarisation on a national lev-el. Nonetheless, it should be reminded that even if Member States (MSs) can launch ref-erenda, it is rare for their nationals to see one. Moreover, a certain discretion is still reserved for critical decisions, and lobbyism affects

any parliament. Concerning the EP, its power enormously grew since the first direct election in 1979 and the co-decision procedure is now the ordinary one. Another aspect in disfavour of critic concerning the EU‘s democratic defi-cit lays within the Treaty of Lisbon, which in-troduces a title dedicated to democratic prin-ciples and gives bolder authority to National Parliaments. It should not surprise anyone if twenty years from now the EU represented a better democratic model than its MSs.

A one-of-its-kind example of democracy in Europe is probably a member of the Euro-pean Free Trade Association, namely Switzer-land. As everyone knows, Swiss citizens get the chance of expressing their opinion on critical (or less so) issues about three times every year. It is the so-called semi-direct de-mocracy. The Swiss can request a referen-dum to approve any Federal Law, when this is not mandatory. They can also launch initia-tives to partially or entirely revise the Federal Constitution, without being submitted to any material limitation but peremptory norms of international law. It sounds very reassuring

BEYOND POLITICAL

DEMOCRACY

by Riccardo Passarella

1# Breakthrough

11

and perfect from outside. However, even the Swiss system is affected by a major deficien-cy. Take for instance the recent approval of the initiative “against mass immigration” on 9 February. The initiative did not pass because the country needed it, but because the voters have been manipulated through a populistic, and almost terroristic, propaganda. In fact, if you asked many of them whether they knew the possible consequences or if they actually had a clue about the contents of the Agree-ment on the Free Movement of Persons, the answer would mainly be negative or wrong (from a juridical point of view). The example shows how a lack of information and educa-tion can guide to a misleading use of direct democracy resembling a legal and permitted abuse, which is no better than a systematic ex-clusion of citizens from the legislative process.

Under these circumstances, it is advisable to elaborate on other aspects of democracy, or democracy lato sensu. While one can argue that civil and political rights precede popular government, it is indubitable that elements such as public education and the welfare state

in general are a consequence of the broad scope of democracy. Education in particular is the expression of a state‘s care towards the citizens. It empowers everyone to build a per-sonal and collective future. Would you be able to learn how to understand all the aspects of a problem and form an opinion without ba-sic- and even better advanced- studies? A well educated citizen is an untameable one. It should be obvious now that the true meaning of democracy is to build citizens and prepare every single one of them for the possibility of making the differencefor instance by becom-ing the head of state.

“It should not surprise anyone if twenty years

from now the EU represented a better

democratic model than its Member States.“

Breakthrough #1

12

A PRISONER’S LIFE: A LONG WAY TO

Prisoners, why should we care?DIGNITY

n ancient societies they were often treated like outcasts. Later, during

the Dark ages, they were locked away to rot in dark dungeons of despair. But now with 147 inmates per 100 places in Italy, and 152 inmates per 100 places in Greece, Europe struggles to find the right approach to deal with its prisoners. Should they be considered as rightful citizens or did they lose all rights to a life of dignity when they chose a life of crime?

One might ask: ‘why both-er ourselves with this hard and ethical question? Why wouldn’t we just act like the generations before us?’

The threat of public humil-iation or the death penalty is surely the best deterrent. Or spending your days on water and bread, locked away in a dungeon far from the outside world, makes it quite impossible to cause any further harm. However, we are currently living in a modern society with regu-lations such as the Univer-sal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that forbids any of the aforementioned punishments. Therefore they are far from a valid solution to tackle crime.

Nowadays the EU has a more benevolent approach to deal with its inmates. Or-ganisations such as Am-

nesty International have been striving for inmates’ rights and more humane conditions for prisoners in which to spend their im-prisonment for centuries. Nonetheless, they still have much to fight for. Guantan-amo Bay for instance shows us to this day how prisoners are getting treated without any dignity.

But that is where the Eu-ropean Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) comes along. Ever since it was founded in 1989, it has been the EU’s official watchdog for safeguarding the human treatment of all prisoners. It is their job to examine and report any vi-

IBy Siebe Geerts

1# Breakthrough

13

olation of prisoners’ rights. Of course some would say that the CPT should not go too far. Protecting the rights of prisoners is one thing, but giving them a better life when behind bars than when on the other side of them?

Sadly this is exactly where the major conflict occurs. Does the UHDR only apply to inmates in its most basic form or do they deserve a certain luxury as well? The fact is that a major part of the population in peni-tentiaries comes from the lower classes in society. Which means that in some cases, life in prison is an improvement compared

to their previous situation. Obviously, for financial and organisational reasons, it is impossible to create a system of imprisonment based on their past situa-tions. However, it might be possible to establish a ba-sic structure that provides all means necessary for a life in dignity, if you imple-ment a system where a cer-tain luxury can be earned with normal social behav-iour.

Of course putting prisoners on a diet of bread and wa-ter is not the best solution, but spoiling them with rec-reational activities such as sports and television does not do it either. The per-

fect approach to the treat-ment of prisoners is still not clear and many cases demonstrate how inmates’ rights are being violated at this very moment. How-ever, organisations such as Amnesty International and institutions like the CPT prove how hot this topic is in all European countries. They also demonstrate how important it is to safe-guard the basic rights of all inmates and to ensure their dignity in all situations. Prisoners might be strayed from the law, but they cer-tainly have not been driven from the minds of Europe-an citizens.

“The perfect approach to the treatment of prisoners is still not clear and many cases demonstrate how in-mates’ rights are being violated at this very moment.“

Breakthrough #1

14

1# Breakthrough

15

EU INSTITUTIONS GUIDE The European Union is known for its various institutions with their differing functions and names. Riccardo Passarella summed up the most important ones:

Member States: Access the treaties, give part of their sover-eignty to the EU and execute European law

National Parliaments: watch over the respect of the princi-ple of subsidiarity and have a say on the revision of the trea-ties and the accession of new Member States (Art. 12 TEU)

European Council: Consists of Heads of State or Govern-ment, its own president and the president of the European Commission. It provides the EU with the necessary impetus for its development and defines the general political direc-tions priorities of the Union. It has no legislative compe-tence. (Art. 15 TEU)

Institutional Triangle

European Commission: Promotes the general interests of the EU, ensures the application of the treaties and acts of secondary EU Law. It executes the budget and manages programmes. It furthermore represents the EU on an exter-nal basis. It has the monopoly on legislative initiative. The president is appointed by the European Council and elected by the European Parliament. The list of candidates is adopt-ed by the Council and the members appointed by the Eu-ropean Council. The commission shall be approved by the European Parliament, which may vote a motion of censure to make the commission resign. (Art. 17 TEU)

Council: Consists of ministers from each Member State. There is only one Council, but it has different compositions depending on the topic in discussion (Agricultural topics —> ministers of Agriculture). It has legislative functions and shall approve the budget. (Art. 16 TEU)

European Parliament: It is directly elected by the Citizens of the EU. It exercises legislative and budgetary functions jointly with the Council. It also exercises functions of politi-cal control and consultation. (Art. 15 TEU)

Excursus on the legislative procedures

Ordinary procedure: The European Parliament and the Council, following a proposal by the commission, jointly adopt an act of Law. Both can make amendments. The final act will be an act of the Parliament and the Council. (Art. 294 TFEU)

Approval procedure: The Council is the only one adopting the act, following a proposal by the commission. Only the council can make amendments, but the Parliament must approve the act.

Consultation procedure: The council adopts the act, fol-lowing a proposal by the commission. It is the only one to make amendments, but the parliament must be asked for its position on the act. It is not required from the council to follow this position and the approval of the Parliament does not affect the adoption of the act.

Other institutions of the EU

European Court of Justice: it Consists of the Court of Jus-tice, the General Court and the specialised courts. The Court of Justice consists of one judge from each Members State and it is assisted by Advocates-General. The General court consists of at least one judge from each Member State and has no General-Advocates. The ECJ ensures that law is ob-served in the application and interpretation of the treaties. (Art. 19 TEU)

European Central Bank: Together with the National Cen-tral Banks of the Member States, it constitutes the European System of Central Banks. Together with the National Central Banks of Member States that adopted the Euro as their cur-rency, it conducts the monetary policy of the Union(Art. 282 TFEU)

Court of Auditors: it consists of one national member of each Member State that must guarantee its independence. The court carries out the audits of the Union, which means that it examines the regularity of expenditures and reve-nues of the European Union and all its bodies (Art. 285 and 287 TFEU)

Specialised institution

European Investment Bank: The members of the Invest-ment Bank are the Member States. It contributes to the balanced and steady development of the Internal Market in the interest of the Union. It operates on a non-profit basis to help the modernisation of less-developed regions of the EU. (Art. 308-309 TFEU)

Breakthrough #1

16

Europe 2020 A predictable failure?

re you aware of the fact that global warming is one of our century‘s most urgent issues? Its effects have alarmed the entire globe‘s

population. Should the debate of sustainable development therefore be revived once more? I am sure you can answer with yes - at least to the previous question. Over the past decades, we tried to propose concrete solutions and to thus draw a conclusion on the severe problems caused by global warming.

It was in 1997, when an international agree-ment, The Kyoto Protocol, was signed on a vol-untary basis. Its main purpose was to reduce greenhouse emissions on the one hand and to find common solutions on the disastrous conse-quences of global warming on the other. More recently, a European agreement was signed 14 years ago in Lisbon: The Lisbon Strategy. Its main concept was a social and environmental renewal. In 2010 we however realised that most of the prescribed goals had not been fulfilled. Therefore The European Commission decided to propose another plan, namely the “Europe 2020” strategy. One of this strategy‘s aims are the so-called “20-20-20 targets“.

Jointly liable, sustainable and intelligent: this is the Europe-to-be described in the ten-year strategy of “Europe 2020“. Its plan of action is supposed to be implemented by the year 2020 and its purpose is not only to let the EU solve its crisis, but also to fill the gaps of our growth model and to create the conditions for a differ-ent kind of economic development by focusing on competitiveness and job creation.

“The targets which the Commission has put on the table are carefully chosen. They address the need to increase the level of employment, to invest more in research and innovation, to meet our 20/20/20 climate and energy targets, to improve our educational performance, and to combat poverty.”

(José Barroso, President of the European Commission)

You have probably heard of the 20-20-20 targets and the Europe 2020 strategy. You have not? Well, no reason to panic. This article was especially written for you. Read it, get the gist out of it and enjoy the profit.

20 % decrease in the consumption

of primary energy

20 % increase in renewable

energy sources

20 % decrease in CO2 emissions

A

1# Breakthrough

17

The five targets the Europe 2020 goals focus on are Employment, more investment in Research and Development (R&D), better Education, fighting poverty and social inclusion as well as Climate change and energy sustainability. The last of these targets is the one this article mainly deals with as already mentioned above.

The main goals of this target are to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, raise the share of energy produced from renewable sources to 20% and take a 20% improvement in the EU‘s energy efficiency. All in all, the goal is to clearly combat climate change and promote the use of renewable energy sources.

In case you are acquainted to the goals of the Lisbon Strategy, you probably noticed that its measures clearly resemble those of the cli-mate-energy package 20-20-20: ambitious ob-jectives, broad confidence in the virtuosity of the Member States in implementing the neces-

sary policies individually and many recommen-dations but no threat of sanctions for any Mem-ber States. Above that, exactly like the Lisbon Strategy, the Europe 2020 strategy turns out to be extremely ambitious and its goals are tre-mendously demanding. Furthermore, it does not consider the existing socio-economic dis-parities and the unequal distribution of oppor-tunities between regions and cities, and within themselves, the conditions which could have been incurred in the years following the sign-ing of the pact: uncontrolled increase in sover-eign debt, monetary imbalances and financial price volatility regarding commodity prices.

Will the strategy manage to fulfill its targets on time? This is disputable. It is however certain that, as for now, it seems that we did not learn anything from the mistakes of the recent past.

By Fabrizio Zamparelli

Breakthrough #1

18

Addictions in Europe Facts collected by Siebe Geerts

1# Breakthrough

19

“Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism.“ - Carl Jung

Breakthrough #1

20

MigrationWould we exist

without it?

By Gianmarco Franchini

1# Breakthrough

21

n order to tackle an issue, especially as complex as the one of migration, requires the development of one‘s own perspective. Choosing a perspective, in turn, means to focus on some aspects more than on others. This article will hopefully

provide you with a larger picture of a phenomenon that is a very complex one, but which may have been essential for our survival on the other.

I

Migration is defined as “the act or an instance of going from one region, country or place of abode to settle in another, especially in a for-eign country”. It is nowadays strictly connected to the concept of “national borders”. Howev-er, migration has existed way before countries were formed as they are today. An example all Italian delegates are probably familiar with is Aeneas’ - a Trojan hero who sets off from his birth place and ventures into an unknown world, in search of a future in Italy. Far from only being an ancient note, the myth of Aene-as encourages us to consider how old migra-tion actually is. This myth, in fact, has been re-cently considered under a new historical light: apparently, it is just a literary reinterpretation of an actual immigration wave of Cretans dat-ing back to the 9th century B.C.

Yet, that is just a small step towards a proper understanding of the historical relevance of migration. This phenomenon can indeed be traced back to the very first movements of our ancestors, the Homo sapiens. Originally born in Africa over 160,000 years ago, they relocat-ed from their homeland to the Arabian Penin-sula around 85,000 years ago. It was not until much later that they moved towards Europe. However, the interesting part is that migration can be considered the reason for our own ex-istence.

Whenever migration occurs, a change of en-vironmental conditions for the migrants is as-sumed. Due to this shift, the individuals who were given an advantage in terms of survival by their genes, may now encounter some dif-ficulties in surviving. Whereas those who were previously disadvantaged, may now be fa-voured by the new habitat and thus give birth to a more consistent offspring, with a similar genetic profile. As a result, some genes which

are beneficial may become more common whilst others become rarer. This happens in all populations. As this process repeats, the hu-man species (consisting of many populations) may become gifted with a much more modi-fied set of genes. Consequently, its members would rather possess a genetic profile that is of advantage when abrupt changes of external conditions like climate change take place.

However, migration does not only support species to develop a higher adaptability to the habitat; it is a valuable source of cultural and economic richness. As John Stuart Mill assert-ed: “It is hardly possible to overrate the value, in the present low state of human improvement, of placing human beings in contact with per-sons dissimilar to themselves, and with modes of thought and action unlike those with which they are familiar” (Principles of Political Econ-omy).

Since Mill wrote these words in 1848, many breakthroughs have taken place and today, the meaning of immigration has changed, es-pecially within the EU. It does no longer imply separation from those who emigrants had left behind, as it once did. Furthermore, the com-position of immigration waves has changed: today’s immigrants are more educated than a century ago. In some cases the countries of destination themselves have transformed from industrialising into industrialised nations.

States thus generally approach the issue differ-ently nowadays: immigrants is no longer seen as a labour force to be employed, but often as a problem, an unsettling, intractable force. Aeneas’ example has already helped us to highlight the historical relevance of migration. Could it also support our search of finding an-other way to conceive immigration?

Breakthrough #1

22

IF WE‘RE ONE TRIBE, he song “Where is the love?” was released by the Black Eyed Peas in 2003 and “One tribe” was released six years later. Howev-

er, their messages seem to be quite similar: we are all human beings with equal rights, rights which need to be protected. Does humanitar-ian intervention succeed at protecting human rights and lives?

Humanitarian intervention is, in theory, char-acterised by one or more states’ use of force against another, aimed at preventing the hu-man right violation of the individuals in that state, often interfering with the state’s internal affairs. This intervention may have been sent by the UN or the EU, but some countries also decide to intervene independently, such as the US.

However, the ethics of humanitarian interven-tion have been questioned since the concept was first born in the 19th century, when France and Britain tried to prevent the Ottoman take-over of Greece. Most scholars believe that countries rarely, if ever, intervene in another

for purely humanitarian purposes. Instead, they are pursuing their own national interests. When in 2011 the US sent humanitarian intervention to Uganda, after there being a humanitarian cri-sis since 1997, many claimed this decision was triggered by the discovery of oil along its bor-der. This was also said to be the reason for their intervention in Iraq and Libya.

Another criticism of humanitarian intervention is that we have no right to intervene in another countries’ domestic affairs. As the black eyed peas sang, “Overseas, yeah, we try to stop ter-rorism, but we still got terrorists here livin‘.” Should we not solve our own countries’ viola-tion of human rights before interfering in an-other’s?

Other critical points of humanitarian interven-tion relate to the cost of human lives and the economic loss. Scott-Fairly embraced many people’s opinion by claiming that “… the use of force for humanitarian ends more often than not has become self-defeating, increasing the human misery and loss of life it was original-

TBY AMY CAMPO MC EVOY

1# Breakthrough

23

WHERE IS THE LOVE? ly intended to relieve.” This view is backed by the case of Iraq, amongst many, where only by 2006 over 600,000 Iraqis had died due to the war.

However, we are “one tribe”, “one race,” we are all human beings with the same rights, and we should not care about “your face”, “the colour of your eyes or the tone of your skin.” Why then would we give our national interests more im-portance than the human rights of other peo-ple? Where is the love?

When in the Rwanda Genocide of 1994 no one intervened, the world looked at the UN in disgust. The death of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Rwandans due to ethnicity was not prevented by anyone or any organisation. The UN and the EU claim to be fighting for human rights, for equality, for freedom. Do we practise what we preach when we turn the other cheek?

One thing is clear; we cannot intervene for our own benefit. “Most of us only care about mon-ey making,‘” but that will not get us anywhere.

As Universalists believe, we have a duty of care for the human population. Because “if you only have love for your own race, then you only leave space to discriminate,” and that, we all know, “only generates hate.”

“Let’s catch amnesia, forget about all that evil.” Let’s fight for fair humanitarian intervention, for a world in which our leaders aim to help, not to make profits. A world in which the individual is the priority, not the GDP or oil.

Let’s fight for the “values of humanity,” “fairness and equality,” because we are all “one tribe,” “One race” and “one time”.

“The UN and the EU claim to be fighting for human rights, for equality, for freedom. Do we

practise what we preach when we turn the other cheek?”

Breakthrough #1

24